There is an undercurrent of subversive ideas within cosmology, which it is quite difficult for the newcomer to this subject to get a balanced perspective. At one level, you appear to have an entrenched mainstream science and, at the periphery, speculative science. To the mainstream, there is much within speculative science that can simply be classed `crackpot`, while those marginalized to the fringe simply classed many in the mainstream as `sheep`.

In many respects neither is a balanced perspective, but there are issues that support both claims. We might also like to bear in mind the very fine line, as history shows us, between education and indoctrination. As essentially a novice to the subject of cosmology, I have to be influenced and guided by the `weight of authority` inherent in the mainstream worldview, but this does not mean I don’t want to know about, and discuss, the counter evidence and alternative theories. For this reason, I want to cite 3 articles that may seen to be anti-mainstream in order gain some perspective of the counter arguments:

Sociology of Modern Cosmology
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0812/0812.0537v1.pdf

I also couldn’t help draw a wry smile at some of the comments in the article, but will assume that the author also wanted to make a few serious points along the way.

As I read the article I couldn’t help drawing some parallels with Richard Dawkins’ idea of `memes`, as a mechanism by which information is transferred within any given society. If you accept the genetic parallel, then memes might also be subject to `natural selection`, although I think Dawkins preferred to liken the spread of memes to viral infection.

Even so, using the genetic analogy, I thought the sheep might actually be better described as the critters with the biggest teeth and the crackpots as the one with the fastest legs. Of course, one of the main points about the survival of the fittest is that the winners can only judged in the context of their local environment, as such ideas may also only have a limited existence. As such, it may only be a matter of time to the next metaphorical `Yucatan Meteor`.

The other 2 articles are written by scientific academics, which seem to take a very critical stance on modern cosmology:

The Case Against Cosmology: M. J. Disney: 2000
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0009/0009020v1.pdf

LCDM cosmology: how much suppression of credible evidence, and does the model really lead its competitors, using all evidence?: Richard Lieu: 2007
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.2462v1.pdf

Taking the claims in these articles does not make me a sceptic or necessarily that I accept their perspective, it is simply part and parcel of a balanced education.